CVE-2025-24308
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedImproper input validation in the UEFI firmware error handler for the Intel(R) Server D50DNP and M50FCP may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceImproper input validation in the UEFI firmware error handler for Intel Server D50DNP and M50FCP allows a privileged local user to potentially escalate privileges by exploiting the vulnerable error handler through crafted input.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the server platform modelCheck the server chassis label, BMC/IPMI web interface, or run 'ipmitool -I lanplus -H <bmc_ip> -U <user> -P <pass> fru print' to confirm the model is D50DNP or M50FCPAffected if The server is an Intel Server D50DNP or M50FCP platform
-
Retrieve the current UEFI firmware versionAccess BMC/IPMI and check firmware information, or use 'ipmitool -I lanplus -H <bmc_ip> -U <user> -P <pass> raw' commands to query UEFI version, or view in UEFI Setup under 'Platform Information'Affected if The installed UEFI firmware version matches or precedes the fixed versions for this vulnerability (compare against Intel's published advisory versions)
-
Confirm error handler accessibilityVerify the UEFI error handler interface is accessible by examining BMC event logs and UEFI diagnostic outputs for error injection pointsAffected if The UEFI error handler can receive externally-supplied input from local privileged accounts
-
Check local privileged user accessReview system user accounts with local administrative or root privileges using 'whoami', 'id', or BMC user management interfaceAffected if A local privileged user account exists that could exploit the vulnerable error handler input path
You are affected if you run an Intel D50DNP or M50FCP server with UEFI firmware versions that contain this vulnerability and have local privileged accounts that can access the flawed error handler input.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply Intel-provided UEFI firmware updates for affected server platforms D50DNP and M50FCP. Restrict local physical access to servers until firmware is patched.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-24308 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-24308 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data